Please note: we have been online over ten years, and we want The Trek BBS to continue as a free site. But if you block our ads we are at risk.Please consider unblocking ads for this site - every ad you view counts and helps us pay for the bandwidth that you are using. Thank you for your understanding.

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

^But my point is that artists in Trek comics can make assumptions that don't mesh with the universe or with authorial intent. The artist may just have been thinking "I need to make this look Abramsy" and not realized that the timelines didn't diverge until 2233, so that anything earlier would've been the same as in the Prime continuity. In short, I'd just chalk it up to an art error rather than concocting excuses for how those nacelles could've existed in the 2160s.

^But my point is that artists in Trek comics can make assumptions that don't mesh with the universe or with authorial intent. The artist may just have been thinking "I need to make this look Abramsy" and not realized that the timelines didn't diverge until 2233, so that anything earlier would've been the same as in the Prime continuity. In short, I'd just chalk it up to an art error rather than concocting excuses for how those nacelles could've existed in the 2160s.

^I haven't read the "Archons" adaptation yet, but from what I gather, that could be more a case of what we thought we knew being wrong, rather than the facts actually being different.

It's incompatible. It doesn't make the comic a bad story in its own right but it should've been an original story.

How exactly is it incompatible?

The main possible differences I can see relate to the apparent age of the Beta III civilization. In the comic, the civilization is in a single city less than a hundred years old, product of a single Earth colony mission using some advanced technology to get started; in the TV show, the civilization is presented as upwards of six thousand years old and apparently indigenous.

I'm used to Trek (especially Trek lit) subtly and sometimes not-so-subtly rewriting things. That the Next Gen crew somehow missed that Soong wasn't really dead in "Brothers" and had an underground lab with an advanced android body he was just waiting to transfer his conciousness into? Yeah, LOL, okay. *wink*

Then there's the whole concept of how literally we should take events from a TV show or movie. For example The Captain's Daughter implies that Evil!Kirk raped Janice in "The Enemy Within", although of course his attack was not shown going that far in the epsiode itself. But could it have happened given the situation? Unfortunately, yes. Would a real-life Gorn look like the guy in the rubber suit from "Arena" or even the dodgy CG from "In a Mirror, Darkly"? Of course not.

The main possible differences I can see relate to the apparent age of the Beta III civilization. In the comic, the civilization is in a single city less than a hundred years old, product of a single Earth colony mission using some advanced technology to get started; in the TV show, the civilization is presented as upwards of six thousand years old and apparently indigenous.

The main possible differences I can see relate to the apparent age of the Beta III civilization. In the comic, the civilization is in a single city less than a hundred years old, product of a single Earth colony mission using some advanced technology to get started; in the TV show, the civilization is presented as upwards of six thousand years old and apparently indigenous.

^I haven't read the "Archons" adaptation yet, but from what I gather, that could be more a case of what we thought we knew being wrong, rather than the facts actually being different.

It's incompatible. It doesn't make the comic a bad story in its own right but it should've been an original story.

How exactly is it incompatible?

The main possible differences I can see relate to the apparent age of the Beta III civilization. In the comic, the civilization is in a single city less than a hundred years old, product of a single Earth colony mission using some advanced technology to get started; in the TV show, the civilization is presented as upwards of six thousand years old and apparently indigenous.

And in the original episode, Landru (the original) is native to Beta III. He's not a Starfleet officer named 'Cornelius Landru' as in the comic.

Then again, I agree that the only things we ever know about Beta III's past in the original episode came from the people talking about it. So I suppose it could have gone down as the comic showed. Besides, the people on Beta III look so completely human, as does their city...

__________________
"But here you are, in the ninth
Two men out and three men on
Nowhere to look but inside
Where we all respond to PRESSURE!" - Billy Joel

^That's right. As I said, it's incompatible with what the characters in the episode believed to be true, but beliefs can be wrong -- especially beliefs about history. Just because a character in a story says something is true, that doesn't absolutely prove it's true. Fictional characters can be mistaken in their beliefs and conclusions, they can be misinformed, they can be liars, or they can be deluded.

Of course, it's easier to reconcile the comic with the episode than with the sequel to it in SCE's "Foundations" storyline, which delves into Beta III society more deeply.

^That's right. As I said, it's incompatible with what the characters in the episode believed to be true, but beliefs can be wrong -- especially beliefs about history. Just because a character in a story says something is true, that doesn't absolutely prove it's true. Fictional characters can be mistaken in their beliefs and conclusions, they can be misinformed, they can be liars, or they can be deluded.

Just three points:

1. There seems to no disbelief by Reger and the other gentlemen with him when Kirk says they come from the valley. So this would be indicative of more than one settlement on Beta III.

2. Never once does Spock make a connection between the technology and Starfleet technology like in the comic.